ABSTRACT
The nature of the difference between psychosis, neurosis and psycho-neurosis is controversial. 1 While some authorities regard it as merely quantitative in the sense that the psychosis represents a more severe form or stage of the neurosis or psycho-neurosis, others make a qualitative distinction: the psychotic, they say, lives in a world of phantasy no longer subject to the ordinary laws of nature and has completely lost contact with reality; the neurotic still lives in the real world but cannot any longer cope with its difficulties. According to this second view, a neurosis may in certain cases be a more serious disturbance of the personality than a psychosis. Whichever view we may prefer, it is generally accepted that in practice the dividing line is often very difficult to draw and that a neurosis or psycho-neurosis may eventually lead to a psychosis, for example a depression to a manic-depressive psychosis. 2 Again, the terms neurosis and psycho-neurosis are often used indiscriminately by psychiatrists, whereas others distinguish between them. 3 The meaning of the distinction is that neuroses can have a somatic origin, psycho-neuroses not. Glover agrees to call certain ‘instinctual and affective disturbances of somatic function organ-neuroses; so long as it is remembered that they have no psychic content and are not therefore psycho-neuroses’. 4 In the following, the term neurosis will be used for the sake of simplicity to cover both categories.
